JUDGMENT Brijesh Kumar Srivastava-II, J. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through entire record. 3. Applicant Upendra Kumar Gupta @ Ram Roop is involved in case crime no.97 of 2015, under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 323 IPC read with Section 16 /17 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, police station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for accused-applicant that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated by levelling allegation of enticement. It has been further contended that the incident is alleged to have taken place before five months, FIR of which has been lodged on 04.02.2015. It has been further contended that the victim lived with co-accused for more than five months without raising any hue and cry. It has been further contended that the accused-applicant is in jail since 25.03.2015, as averred in para-13 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. 5. Bail is opposed by the learned Additional Government Advocate on the ground of factual assertions made in the FIR, but statement of the victim recorded under Section 16 4 Cr.P.C. is not disputed. It is also not disputed that no other allegation except enticement has been made against the accused-applicant. Other assertions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant does not inspire confidence. 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the contentions raised by learned counsel for both sides, and without entering into merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let applicant Upendra Kumar Gupta @ Ram Roop accused of above-mentioned crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions: (i) the applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law; (ii). In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law; (ii). the applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (iii). in case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law, under Section 17 4-A of the Indian Penal Code; and (iv) the applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.